From the Charlie Rose show. Mark Halperin reports on Obama's frustration with the media.

"It is strange to get to be President of the United States having never had tough, negative coverage. I think you'd look long and hard to find anyone in the modern era, who got to office without that. Barack Obama never did."

A little self-serving, considering the reason he hasn't experienced any tough, negative coverage is because the state media swaddled him like a newborn. Clinton was also shocked when the media turned on him, but only because they were giving him such a nice horsey ride until the Monica thing.

Scott Brown hasn't even been sworn in yet and he's the preferred chew toy on MSNBC for no other reason that he's a Republican who has dare to get in the way of the left's agenda.

There's is nothing a Republican president can do except go over the heads of the media, straight to the American people. A Republican President can't afford the symbolism that is stock and trade of Democrat Presidents.

Consider the economy for a moment. The Bush years were economically good for the U.S., understanding of course that the sub-prime bomb (manufactured and lit by Democrats...) was smoldering away the whole time. What did we hear from the liberal media?

"Sure there is job growth, but not enough to keep pace for the young people coming into the work force".

What do we hear now?

"Obama created OR saved some imaginary number of jobs. The stimulus is working!"

By the low standard the Obama administration has set, the George Bush years were Shangri-la.

Its one thing to have a President wedded to wrong-headed policies. Quite another to have one who is a weenie to boot.